Few clues as Air France Flight 447 investigation begins

The other huge complication to this incident is the fact that it occurred over the ocean. FDRs, cockpit voice recorders etc. will be difficult if not impossible to find, and so there might not ever be the benefit of "lessons learned" from this flight.

This is certainly a chilling reminder to those of us who are so impatient to see the 787 fly of just what is at stake.

Unfortunately, this Air France flight vanished on the wrong side of the world: near Latinamerica. Here in Latinamerica everything is about fighting the Revolution, be rich and be powerful. And look like Marxists. Everything about the people problems, dramas and simple lifes is secondary. A vanished plane, en route from Paris to Rio would be a solved mistery now. Here, the required investment to solve this problem, was never made.

Based on what was automatically transmitted by ACARS is is apparent that the aircraft was lost as the result of an in-flight breakup.

Where the break up started could be based on the electrical system failure that was reported in the ACARS Message.

It would seem that there could be a structural flaw in the airframe design of the A-330-200. The aircraft seemed to be carrying a light load of passengers and is evident with it cruising at it's maximum certificated service ceiling of 35,000 Ft.

High cycle fatigue should not be suspect in the events that lead up to this accident due to the airframes age total time in service and cycles.

I also cannot put 100% of the blame on the weather. However, it could have contributed to the structural failure. One must remember that the available physical pressures (air density) that act on a pressure vessel at altitude are less stressful at altitude (35,000) than say on decent for landing at 6,000 Ft MSL (higher pressure).

If the wreckage can be recovered and analyzed I am sure that the cause can be determined. The FDR and the CVR might not provide and addtional data due to the nature of an in-flight break up.

If there a structural flaw in the A330 is discovered it could mean an end to use of the type design based on re-design / repair costs.

Before the awarding of the KC-130 replacement tanker contract, the USAF needs to evaluate the structural limitations of this airframe (before modification and after).

Finally, lets all hope and pray that this was not the work of people with i'll wills toward the civilized world...

@TEXAN,

I simply cannot understand how you can deduce anything form what we knos as fact and I cannot understand your way of using it as an argument for the tanker bid. Please go at airdisatser.com and have a look on the 767 records!

Texan,

Sorry to say this but I find your tying of this completely unexplained tragedy with a US defence contract and US jobs offensive.

Say a prayer for the passengers and crew on Air France Flight 447.

Texan is an imbecile as evidenced by his banal ravings-there is no nexus between KC135 replacement and the tanker bid won by Airbus.

We need to determine what the actual ACARS messages were-the connection if any between loss of cabin pressure and electrical failure. Did the aircraft experience rapid decompression due to pneumatics malfunctions, was the reports of severe CB cell activity a cause of the loss of control? If so this would explain the potential for dual engine flameout if the aircraft encountered severe turbulence where engines can flameout, leading to dual generator failures, electrical failures, pack failures and loss of altitude.

The pilots would be attempting relight and emergency descent procedures leaving little time to send a distress call.

Contrary to what TEXAN moronically thinks, NO aircraft can withstand severe damage from thunderstorms if it penetrated a cell. TEXAN should keep his uneducated opinions to himself and not add to the distress and trauma suffered by the relatives and airline involved in this tragedy.

I read where there is no radar in the area of the probable crash. Do these modern aircraft have some kind of GPS or whatever where their flight path can be determined or does all that info go down with the airplane?

Wouldn't a plane such as this have modern weather radar? Is it possible that it could have deviated around these cells while in the middle of the Atlantic, outside the area of ATC radar coverage? Probably sparse traffic in that area at that time...

Weather was probably a factor but it seems difficult to believe that they could not have maneuvered around it.

I think this is a repeat of flight 587.

1) Airplane hits an extremley strong and gusty storm.
2) Tail ( carbon composites) dislocates and causes explosive decompression
3) Airplane crashes.

I try to avoid Airbuses after AA 587. And will avoid 787 at all costs.

Nothing like the good old 767. No fly-by-wire, no composites.

As sad as the incident is re AF the KC-135 comment still stands as factual.

As early as 2005 rumors circulated re an Airbus replacement for the 50+ year old Boeing KC-135 workhorses.

In Feb 08 The USAF announced that the KC-45 would replace the KC-135 ". . .The KC-45A is based on the A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) system, built by Airbus"

The comment above is illustrating the need to make sure the base structure of the A-330 is sound.

We all pray for those on board and those left behind. It is too early to speculate on the reason(s) for the incident, but on going programs using the A-330 have to be evaluated again.

A few references re the KC-135 program:
http://defense-update.com/newscast/0208/news/news_290208_kc45a.htm

http://www.jamespot.com/a/22333-US-Air-Force-Selects-KC-A-as-KC-Replacement.html

Prototype photo is here:
http://www.airliners.net just search for KC-45.

Oh, I know! Someone did steal the plane just in the air!

How else can the plane, with a lot of moddern electronics, suddenly disappear with no evidence?

Either the terrorist's bomb or military missile should be envolved.

Well this has been said before and we all are assuming, we do not know anything for sure on how or why it crashed. We only have an ACARS message to go on and we speculate, lets not fight on who is right or wrong, we all have valid reasons but I think the aviation world is more interested in finding out how to prevent this type of accident again then on who is right or wrong.

But putting that all aside I must say Jorge has an interesting point on the break up and a nice reference also, as far as saying avoiding the 787 all together I think that is a bit far but a good point none the less.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587

But then again AA587 was only "shortly after takeoff" so he wasn't that high enough to cause explosive decompression, but still a good point. Only time will tell what really happened.

TEXAN...that was the most useless and insensitive comment at a tragic event. A B707 was destroyed in CAT long time ago...does that mean that there was a structural flaw in the 707???? For God's sake spare a thought for the families involved in this disaster and take your anti-Airbus rant somewhere else.

GFM: Brazil wants this solved as much as France does. What do Marxists have to do with this?

Plus it may be Senegal or Cape Verde doing the investigation instead. Plus France will be involved as well.

Jorge in Miami: The AA 587 crash was a combination of Airbus A300's design AND American Airlines's over-aggressive training problem. Since the crash AA redesigned its training and no more have gone down.

A330 is different from the A300. Your goal to not fly on any Airbuses seems paranoid and not necessary.

G.F.M Latin America wrong side?

As an argentine who lives in LatinAmerica, and has lived in different countries in SouthAmerica, I can tell you that maybe the countries don't have the technical infrastructure to make a good search, but the people is excellent.
,
As a rescue diver, I know exactly what the professionals can do.
The sea is huge. How many years and money did it take to find the Titanic?

By the way, why doesn't your country looks for the plane?

THE MYSTERY OF AIR FRANCE FLIGHT 447 IS THIS:

The heir of the Brazilian Throne, Prince Pedro Luis de Orleans e Braganca, was the target within Air France Flight 447.

An Air France jet with 228 people on board is feared to have crashed in the ocean off the coast of Brazil.
Heard this on the radio earlier on my way back home from the mall. Air France flight AF 447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris disappeared from the radar while flying over the Atlantic Ocean.
The video from the scene:Air France jet-video-online

It was not the 660th A330 built. If was the 660th aircraft built on the combined A330 / A340 productionline.

Peter

I know that there's almost no actual information about this crash, and I don't want to cast aspersions on anybody or any company, but I am curious about something.

I know the for the 787 Boeing has done a tremendous amount of work trying to secure a composite airplane from lighting. I have heard them claim that the system they are using is one of the most proprietary aspects of the program.

I wonder about the composite fins and rudders of planes like the A300/330/340. Did they get the same kind of revolutionary treatment as the 787 has?

I've been in a plane hit by lightning -- an old 727 back in 1970. The captain helpfully told the passengers that the plane was just the subject of "a static electricity discharge" -- so I know that lightning strikes are not usually a serious problem if they are planned for.

Thad Beier

To rule out sabotage, they will have to find the remains of the fuselage showing no petalling against the airstream, the signature of semtex.

One experience I had was in the tail of an A330 coming through a storm into Bangkok. It moved so much I thought it was going to break off! I know they are supposed to flex but this was extremely uncomfortable and I have never had such a sensation in the back seat of Boeings, MDs, or other Airbuses. Hope it wasn't the tail coming off as has been suggested.

Everybody has an opinion or a worry about the current and future aircraft! Nobody knows at this stage and there is no point in making assumptions of what happened! We cant assume what nobody knows! As far as composites, fly-by wire technology and other new technologies concerned, so far there are no proven dangers or problems with that! The argument of wether boeing or airbus, new or old changes nothing about this disaster, millions of flights everywhere around the world arrive safely, The 228 people on that flight were extremely unlucky. My thoughts are with those families! My other hope is for a quick and thorough investigation so the affected friends and families will be able to find the answers!

No radio distress message from the pilots suggests sabotage or a bomb. Emergency radios are on a battery bus so even complete electrical or structural failure doesn't preclude a MAYDAY. It is unlikely that even the severest turbulence would cause instantaneous and total destruction of the airplane such that the pilots couldn't make a call.

The speculation by Jorge about the Tail Fin just doesn't wash with me. Here's why:

The piece recovered from 447 is jagged. It is not a clean break from the bolts like 587 was.

587 was due as much to pilot error (over-correction of rudder due to vortex turbulence) as to any claim or fear of composite delamination.

But there's no accounting for ignorance and people fearing what they don't know.

Here is a rather unintendedly humorous account by a CNN reporter, who got the Fin 270 degrees off in his high-tech video placement in the aircraft:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/06/10/brazil.plane.crash/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

The media are mostly idiots in this. Only seasoned experts like Cox have it right: Just about anything could have happened, but it is unlikely the following happened:

Flying through a T-cell. Pilots don't do this.

Turbulence. The aircraft is designed for it, and though they had some, other aircraft did too and it was moderate to heavy, but not beyond the 5G's required to "break up" an aircraft.

The most plausible explanation is pitot's, whereby the plane was underspeed and unable to handle the turbulent conditions. This would be the "chain of events" that Cox and others are surmising, and which cause the majority of these horrible accidents.

Remember folks. 1 in 70 million. Those are pretty good odds when flying and pretty bad odds when contributing to the lottery.

For the last ten years there hasn’t been a technical reason why the digital flight recorder data isn't sent in real-time to the ground (see the BBC/Equinox video “The BOX”, 2000, on the flight recorders). Then with-in a couple of seconds you have the planes position/location, its attitude, velocity, etc. safely stored on the ground and used for flight safety, aviation security and cost reduction. This data used in real-time could have also prevented 9/11 (see http:safelander.com). We presently have the viable technology to securely do this. This information could be used for flight safety, aviation & national security and cost reduction to the flying public. We presently don’t know what went wrong on Flight 447, but we would surely know where the plane went down, when it went down, why it went down and possibly could have saved lives.

The real-time use of the data recorders will save a substantial amount of lives, make our country safer and reduce the cost of flying. Telemetering the flight data to the ground in real-time would assure that we have the data - in many crashes the flight data isn't recovered (e.g. 9/11, et al) or has errors in it since no one is looking at it, or using it in real-time to find malfunctions. Yet, this valuable digital flight recorder data (DFDR) data has been left to the autopsy mode for post mortem simulations and not utilized proactively in real-time to save lives. We got our astronauts back from the moon by ground personnel monitoring the data in real-time. It was the ground personnel that found the problem and relayed back to the capsule the safe solution that saved the astronauts lives. Yet, the real-time data has been intentionally withheld and stored on operational planes for fear of aviation industry litigation.

A year prior to 9/11 I spoke in NY at the International Aviation Safety Association meeting on preventing crashes like golfer Payne Stewarts decompression crash. Nothing was done by the FAA or industry and we got 9/11 (hijacking is about ten percent of aviation fatalities) and the 2005, 100 fatality, Helios decompression crash. When a plane deviates from its approved flight plan we now have the ability to securely take remote control of it and land it safely at a designated airfield. We presently have remote pilot vehicles flying now utilizing secure high bandwidth communication networks (we use them for our submarines, AWACS planes, etc.) and there isn't a logical reason for not making that technology available for cargo and carrier aircraft. The cost of 9/11 alone is ten times the cost of putting in a safe system and yet nothing has intentionally been done. We would also be accruing additional annual safety and cost benefits.

When a plane decompresses there is a good possiblity if we remotely bring it down in altitude to a point where there is sufficent oxygen and fligh it remotely for 15 minutes the pilot and passengers may regain consciousness. At that time the control of the aircraft could be returned to the pilot if they are capable of flying the aircraft or remotely landing it to save the lives of the people who are onboard.

On June 4, 2009 the Los Angeles Times took a section of a letter that I sent to them and put this in their LETTERS section:

“There is no technical reason why digital flight recorder data are not sent in real-time to the ground. We have the technology to do this. Then, within a couple of seconds, we would have a plane’s position, altitude and velocity safely stored on the ground. This information could be used for flight safety, aviation security and cost reduction. We don’t know what went wrong on Flight 447, but we would sure know where the plane went down, why it went down and possibly could have saved lives.” Getting to the crash site early may save lives, getting the DFDR can prevent recurring fatal crashes. It’s not just position that’s needed it’s all of the data sent to the recorder that is critical to ascertaining the root cause of a crash and should be available to prevent some of the crashes from occurring.

The real-time use of the data recorders will save a substantial amount of lives, make our country safer and reduce the cost of flying. Telemetering the flight data to the ground in real-time would assure that we have the data - in many crashes the flight data isn't recovered (e.g. 9/11, et al) or has errors in it since no one is looking at it, or using it in real-time to find malfunctions. Yet, this valuable digital flight recorder data (DFDR) data has been left to the autopsy mode for post mortem simulations and not utilized proactively in real-time to save lives.

This, Air France flight 447, is another example of horrific crashes that possibly could have been prevented and save lives. We surely would be able to use the flight data to prevent recurring crashes of this type and to minimize the anguish of the passengers families and the cost and time of trying to recover the recorders. The aviation industry has always attempted to minimize their liability. They fought against flight recorders and lost. Now they are fighting to keep the information going to the flight recorders industry private even if that jeopardized national security and been responsible for countless aviation fatalities. Their lobby is so strong that they have put a Titanic clause into all fights over international waters. This Titanic clause limits a family member of a passenger that is killed in a flight to a small fraction of the persons earning capacity even if the industry is found at fault. This has been printed in fine print on the back of every ticket. They were not successful in getting this egregious law over land since people were watching and protested. Thus, by their own action they don’t care first for the passengers and second for their industry. The only way to change this and to make passenger safety and national security come first is if the public demands that the flight recorder data be available in real-time to be used to prevent crashes from initially occurring (real-time use of the recorder data) as well as recurring crashes (autopsy mode post flight recorder analysis) and that the flight data isn’t the private property of the airline industry to suppress out of fear of litigation.

Sy Levine

sylevine1@sbcglobal.net
levines@wlac.edu

http://www.safelander.com

Remote Aircraft Flight Recorder and Advisory System (RAFT) patent #5,890,079, 3/30/1999

Ground the Airbus?

Used in law, science and philosophy, a rule known as Occam’s Razor requires that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex, and/or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.

We do not know if Air France Flight 447 was brought down by a lightning storm, a failure of speed sensors, rudder problems or pilot error. What we do know is that its plastic tail fin fell off and the plane fell almost seven miles into the ocean killing everyone aboard.

Article at Consortium News: http://consortiumnews.com/2009/062009a.html

Or at Global Research: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14025

Investigators must not close this case and suggest it is impossible to resolve, their are clues in front of them everywhere and I strongly suggest they should hang in there. Its only a matter of time before leading clues reveal themselves. Why I stress investigation to continue is that we need to find ways of conducting investigations on ocean floors since plains fly over the ocean all the time and this plain not being the first plain to crash into the ocean.

Cant Airbus/Boeing develop a plain that has safety features to protect passengers and allow the plain to crash alone, something more similar to the yacht manufactured for Russian billionaire Abramovic by the Germans.

Look at rockets going to space, at certain altitudes one piece separates from the rocket and falls back to earth (how does it land on the ground and where?) and as the rocket continues to a different altitude another piece falls off etc...

What I am trying to say, if we involve everybody in aviation to seek solutions I think our planes can have state of the art safety features.